Just Posted: Canon PowerShot G1 X review

We've just posted our review of the Canon PowerShot G1 X. Rather than going down the mirrorless camera route, Canon has opted to create a large sensor zoom compact. The result is the G1 X, a camera that offers a near-APS-C-sized sensor in a slightly enlarged G-series body. With its 28-112mm equivalent, F2.8-5.8 stabilized lens, it offers similar capability to an entry-level DSLR in a more convenient package. So how does the G1 X stack-up as a more compact Rebel replacement? Read our review to find out.

Comments

I am weighing up buying one for street use, maybe some camera designer will come up with the ultimate street shooter, something discreet, the flippy screen is handy, the tuff body is a boon, the slow focusing is a no,no. the big sensor makes the effort rewarding, but yea a small fast to use street shooter, thats what i would like.

dpreview: "... and comfortable rubber grips"sorry mates! I don't buy it. it looks to me almost as impossible to hold the G1X with one hand by the grip as it is to hold the G12, which, by the way, is impossible. and this is a big set-back for me, because a camera with tilting screen can't hang on your neck, because the strap hangs in between the screen and your eyes. and if you can't hold in one hand by the grip, so how do you hold it? this is just a lousy ergonomy.

It may look impossible to you - but did you try it? I can hold the camera with my right hand just fine. Thumb on the back, pointer finger on shutter release, rest of fingers (3 in my case) on front around grip.

It's tempting as I get very tired of carrying my D90 and backpack full of equipment. However, the lens is just too slow for me. Never could deal with the slow kit 3.5-5.6 lenses...this is of that ilk. A shorter zoom range and faster glass might well get my attention.

Forgot to add that I looked at this camera when my local dealer first got them in and it just reinforced my opinion of the slow lens. The demo camera had difficulty focusing on items within the shop which were at normal room lighting levels. Eventually it would get them in focus, but it took too long to be useful for my kind of photography.

Can't confirm the focus issue indoors under normal indoor lighting conditions. May be you experienced the close focus limitations of the lens and did not switch to close up mode? Happened to me in the beginning all the time because I was so used to the G11.

It is a matter of getting used to it. Hopefully Canon will solve this problem in the next firmware upgrades, as in auto mode the camera switches automatically to the necessary mode, normal or macro. One of the strong points of this camera is its wonderfull low light capability. The maximum apperture of pro zoom lenses is also 2.8. Unfortunately the lens becomes quickly slower with zooming, but this is the price for this size...I am using the camera since a month and it is great...

I bought a G-1X and have the same problem but not all the time. There are times when it simply hunts. I tried both the flexi-zone focusing and standard face-recognition. It will go into perfect focus instantly and then snap out and go back and forth once per second.

OK folks! Time to lighten up. The pros and cons of the G1 X have been covered ad nauseam and some of the posters here are just being trolls. That might have been intentional or it might not. If the following page doesn't make you smile please be advised that you are part of the problem, not part of the solution.http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/03/hammerforum-com

Yes I register in order to ask question in this forumI post lot of question in scuba forum about this camIndeed I hav an old A95 and want to upgradeBut I think that the G12 will be better than this G1XThat's why I posted my thread

Excellent Image quality. Beats any other compact or 4/3 I have used, and gives many DLSR’s a run for their money.

Excellent handling with full spread of manual controls right where I need them.

Fantastic low light performance: useable shots throughout ISO range, combined with great image stabilisation, means you will still be taking natural portraits with well-lit backgrounds when other compacts and 4/3’s will be making their subjects look like pasty red-eyed 2D cut-outs with their built-in flash.

Macro? The smallest area you can fill a frame with is an ~15 by 20 cm (4.5 by 6') area. This meets my needs- because of the image quality I can crop a fair amount when need be. So – not as good as the G12, but fine for many users.

AF performance? I have a highly mobile 3 year old and have no problem taking photos of him, without flash, in low light. Set the camera to continuous, face-recognition focus and off you go. Not as fast as a DSLR, but better than most recent compacts I have used.

Speed: Maybe I’m showing my age but when I leant photography (developing medium format film) I learn to take 1 good shot rather than 100s of poor shots. Maybe it’s the modern area, but I don’t understand the fascination with shots per second.

This camera gets the wow factor from me for the image quality and low light performance. The manual controls are great as I hate wading through menus when shooting.

If you want to take dozens of photos a second of small flowers then buy a DLSR.

What "highly mobile 3 year-old" is easy to photograph without the ability to take multiple shots? If a camera offers that, without worries over which lens to use and at a lower cost, why put it down? Of course, I'd be curious to know which other devices or lenses TassieR has used. Why no comment whatever on the controversial slow AF?

Yep the camera has arrived down here. For a change its actually cheaper in Australian stores (around AUD$750) than online.

The reason I haven’t mentioned the 'controversial slow AF' is, to be completely honest, because I haven't actually noticed anything wrong with the AF. Sure there are cameras out there that are faster but I would hesitate to say the focus is slow. I'd say its par for course for a compact.

I haven’t read all of this thread, or most of the review, so I should give it a read so I know what problem I should be looking for. If I find an issue I'll post it.

Yep - a higher frame rate would be great, but as you know all cameras are compromises and you select the photographic tool that suits your needs. We could wait long time for the 'perfect' camera to arrive.

Recent cameras in the home and office include G12s, early PENs and a EOS500. Not a large range I admit but most of my mates are enthusiasts so I’ve played with a few other recent models.

This seems like a perfect landscape camera for those willing to live with this specific aperture / lens combination, and lack of a good viewfinder. Personally, the CSC cameras have a lot more to offer in terms of AF, fast lenses, and EVF's that I'd still go that route...the senor is marginally larger than MFT options and you gain a lot more image quality in low light being able to add an f/1.8 lens.

Depth of field control is still limited compared to large sensor PLUS large aperture. This camera seems to tick the boxes but ultimately doesn't add up to a compelling option for me.

"you gain a lot more image quality in low light being able to add an f/1.8 lens"

True only if you gonna take pictures wideopen.

What about zooming a bit or being able to zoom considerably in the low light without carrying your backpack with huge lenses.Do not forget about the great IS system Canon installed into G1X that beats IS from all other manufacturers.

This will find its way into many kits. The advantage of the mirrorless Compact System Camears is ability to adapt so many vintage film era lenses, including macro. That 50mm macro most had in their lines becomes a really nice 75mm macro with the Samsung and Sony CSCs and a 100mm macro with Olympus and Panasonic CSCs. Both great focal lengths for practical macro work.

This camera reminds me of the S1is. When that camera was first introduced, it satisfied a demand in the market that no other model did as well. But it was a slow camera with very basic features. Then a little later, they came out with the S2is. They added a little more zoom, more megapixels, stereo microphones, simultaneous capture of video & stills, a larger LCD, and a few other things. But that was enough to convince me to upgrade. I'll bet that's their plan for this camera. Make it good enough that people will buy it, but don't make it too good. You've gotta keep them coming' back for more! But the competition is fierce now, so I don't think that philosophy's going to work as well anymore. Some brands are putting their all into their designs, and that's what I like.

Correct. What we tend to forget in these companies is the time to develop and manufacture products, they need to ship early as possible with good results. Additionally, it has become a trend in some products withholding some features that are easy to implement or include but only on the next version.

I owned 3 G Series Canons and they were great all round cameras, but I think that the fixed retractable lens design are flawed because the dust gets in a bit to easily. If you use this camera outdoors, I recommend you pay the extra $150.00 or so for an extended warranty.I'm now using a weather sealed interchangable lens and camera system and wish I had done it earlier.

A large-sensor-fixed-lens-mirrorless camera doesn't make sense in my opinion due to the fast evolution of the mirrorless system. mirrorless cameras of today are much much better of mirrorless cameras of two years ago. It's better to buy a decent interchangable lens mirrorles camera today and a couple of excellent lenses. Two short years from now you can upgrade to a much better mirrorless camera and already have the lenses. But if you buy the G1X today, what will you do with it in 2014?The question is: don't Canon and Nikon understand that in a couple of years the mirrorless cameras quality will match the best DSLR ?

This kind of opinion is one symptom of the upgrade society we've evolved into. We are so hellbent on always having the most modern gadget that we forget there will always be something better created by electronics companies for the express purpose of upgrading. We have to have the maximum level of convenience or latest and greatest that we seem to forget the great speed and quality our old devices still provide. This isn't an age of slow evolution from the analog to digital age -- this IS the digital age. In the case of cameras Moore's Law may apply to the digital components, but to optics (and by association detail resolution) and mechanisms the same does not apply. We're starting to max out what can be done with optics and how much detail a sensor can extract, but gadgetry (GPS, WiFi, 3-D, touchscreens....) and combining previous technologies (CMOS sensor and Phase Detect AF sensors, for example) are still ripe for the picking. My G1 X won't be obsolete as quickly as you think.

Don't get me wrong. At some point the increase in image quality does become compelling. In the realm of DSLR's advancement was impressive in this area, but that acceleration has slowed, and now they're trying to shrink everything, necessitating some innovation, but mostly it's just a shift from one gimmick to another. The megapixel wars finally waned a bit (Nikon's 36MP sensor proves they didn't realize that particular party was coming to an end) and then the zoom wars and compact wars kicked in. People think they NEED a 30X optical zoom? It's nice that DSLR's inspired the ILC market to innovate, but removeable lens cameras don't do everything. ILC's don't do everything. P&S's don't do everything. There was bound to be hybrids and hybrids of hybrids created. It just so happens the G1 X sticks closer to the P&S philosophy. For that I am greatful. My 7D and many lenses still work great. Thank goodness it doesn't have WiFi, GPS, a touchscreen, an EVF, monster zoom, etc. $$$

look, the GX1 has has slow AF. Mirrorless cameras are improving contrast AF speed month after month. They still cant match DSLR AF speed, but Nikon showed that a mirrorless can have fast phase AF.... EVF is also improving to the point that a mirror will be as obsolete as a dynosaur... My point is: if you buy one camera, does it make sense to buy a fixed lens camera?

Howard, Valentinian does say that he or she would keep the lenses and be able to upgrade the digital end of the system. That's the part that, as you said, may be subject to Moore's law. I've been wondering what Canon's answer to the challenge of ILCs and I would say it's an interesting approach but probably not the right answer. At this stage in sensor development, the lens is the limiting factor in attaining image quality, but new features in the body can help you make better use of the lens. Valentinian is right. When a significant improvement comes along, it's nice to be able to buy a new body and keep the lenses. And he's correct in saying that mirrorless cameras (or cameras with a fixed semi-transparent mirror) will match DSLRs. Look at the somments about image quality in the dPreview review of the NEX7, for example.

If you own a DSLR and lenses, it does not make any sense to buy a new system and new lenses when all you want is DSLR quality in a small package. No sense what so ever. That are the customers (like me) for the G1X. A fixed lens makes all the sense in the world because I will not cary an additional tele zoom, leave alone several prime lenses, when all I want is a small camera with DSLR IQ.

Agreed, mcslsk. I can't speak for people who only buy one camera, but I can say that people certainly have very different attitudes towards photography. Mike and Val, here is the real point you need to remember: some people either don't give a flip about photography or just care enough to buy a point and shoot. I don’t share that perspective, but most people do. Anything with Phase Detect AF and a narrow depth of field requires a steep learning curve. Some people don't have a clue what "focus and recompose" means. So you either have to manually choose your AF point or know that when you focus and recompose you may move the plane of focus behind your subject. Many people let the camera choose one of the few AF points and are angry when the camera doesn’t focus on their intended subject. They probably think the camera should be smart enough to figure things out for them. They probably also think their smartphone really is smart and their LG tv is more than a tv.

The G1 X is a “photographer’s point and shoot” (as stated by this website) because it has the potential for a much narrower depth of field than the standard P&S, which then brings with it some complexities usually associated with DSLR’s. And as for Interchangeable Lens Cameras or Compact System Cameras (I don't like MILC....my PC is mirrorless but I don't call it a MPC) here is where we are today: the prism is a live, high resolution preview that has yet to be matched. Yes, one day it may become obsolete but it is tried and true technology. When EVF's become cost effective, or at least cheaper than an actual VF, we'll talk. Either way there is a long list of variables that influence one’s decision. I could write a ten page thesis proving how your original statement is an egocentric point of view, but suffice it to say we don’t all have the same priorities. As for G1 X's AF speed, it's acceptable for a P&S. I own a 7D. I like fast AF. There are times slower AF is very usable.

By the way, Val, do you shoot exclusively in RAW? I personally think everyone shoot shoot in RAW and post process their images. Do you think that opinion is going to turn everyone who picks up a camera into a RAW shooter?

That's exactly why I bought the G1X , I'm not replacing my DSLR I just wanted something with good IQ that was more portable. I don't want the expense of buying into another detachable Lens system, the G1X suits me just fine; I'm sure there a lot more folk out there that think the same way, in my opinion that's why Canon went down this route.

Note that if you search DP Review for "Canon PowerShot G1 X light leak", you'll come up with NO links or discussions of the problem...what the hell is going on at DP Review? Is it run by Canon fanboyz?

Steven, it took me some time and effort to reproduce the effect which only occurs at 50mm, high shutter speed and small aperture. All images taken so far under everyday conditions in bright sunlight do not show the effect. IR states that they believe this to be so rare that hardly anyone will encounter it in daily use. You can follow the discussion on their site.

Steven, reps from DPReview have responded in forum posts that they attempted to recreate that effect but were unable to do so. Maybe what you should note is that there is very little data to support the theory this issue effects every single G1 X. Even if it did effect every camera the settings and circumstances required to recreate it are extremely unlikely to ever occur.

Howard, hate to disagree with you but it does affect every G1X (confirmed by Canon) but it is, as you say, so unlikely to show that it is not a practical issue. I wonder whether one could even create an automatic fix as the area in which this appears in the image and the shape of it is always the same.

Not to get all lawyer or scientist on you, but I was referring to data and I haven't seen the complete statement from Canon on the issue. So, I will assume that I'm being told the truth and that every G1 X will produce the same results. Considering the circumstances required to reproduce the "glow dots" I'll simply say this: I'm almost certain that my 7D is NOT bulletproof, but I won't be shooting it with a 9mm pistol any time soon to test that hypothesis. Or how about this: if I EVER shoot in a condition that will produce glow dots I will immediately run out and buy exactly one lottery ticket with the knowledge that the universe wants me to win. I'd put the lottery odds of 1 in 175,000,000 on me ever needing to shoot "1/4000 second and higher than ISO1600" through "1/500 second and ISO12800".

There are many in this forum who wish for a zoom lens starting at 24mm/f2.0 on the G1X. The fact is, if Canon were to choose a 24mm/f2.0 on the G1x, they would probably also use the 1/1.7" sensor from the S100 in order to maintain a sensible size. The image quality for the G1X would then be very close to the S100, just like the G12/S95 pair. So, for those who want a 24mm/f2.0 lens and do not give a hood about the sensor size, then why not consider the S100?

" So, for those who want a 24mm/f2.0 lens and do not give a hood about the sensor size, then why not consider the S100?"

Because for the 4mm more wide angle you loose the hot shoe, the OVF (yes, that crappy little, yet important thing), and IQ in particular at high ISO that allows cropping, editing and large prints. If all that is not important, then the S100 is a great camera.

I've spent more than a few years taking pictures, a lot of them bad, but that is part of getting it right. I started out using a 120 format twin lens reflex - talk about bulky. I did my own developing and enlarging. Then I bought the full meal deal SLR kit - big bag, big lenses, small lenses (and nice wide angle lenses where $$$ then too), big flash and did I mention a big bag. Oh ya I had a small-ish bag too for just the body and the 50-200. One thing I learned very slowly, it doesn't matter one bit how kick ass your multi-lens kit is, if you don't have it with you. It is odd but when you don't have it you don't get *the* shot - heck you don't get any shots. So my goal changed, I wanted a decent camera I could take with me. I have had quite a few - I remember when the S20 came out, I jumped right on it. The G series and ones like are are for me the ideal camera, but the lack of good video always held me back from the earlier versions. I few years back I bought a TX1 -cont...

the TX1 is a pretty crappy still camera, but it takes decent video, and has great stabilisation. The earlier Gs did not zoom while shooting video a deal breaker for me. The G1X shoots better video than the 5DMkII which has been used in plenty of commercial projects and it has kick ass stabalisation. And, it takes great still shots too within its limitations. The Sony NEX-7 and 5 are really nice, better IQ than the G1X for sure, and if they had a pancake zoom in the same quality of the G1X, it would be a contender for me. I guess in a lot of ways I am the G1X target customer, I want to shoot some video, decent stills but my camera must fit in my windbreaker pocket. If I wanted better shots and better lenses I would go buy a 5DMkIII and another big bag. And the kit would sit at home a lot of the time. For me that is pointless. The G1X is plenty fast for the stills I want to take. If I want to capture motion I will just shoot video anyway.

I do not see this camera as a compelling one in the current market. It struggles to "bridge" the gap between the larger sensor higher quality images and the compactness and versatility of smaller cameras.

Basically it is trying to be small enough to be pocketable and maybe it is but it compromises too much on Focus speed (this is just from the review and frankly it is probably not that bad) and distance (which instead is a big disadvantage at least in my applications).

In the "bridge" market I prefer the M43 offering which has lots of flexibility, kit options that are smaller and lighter, and similar or better image quality (thanks to the interchangeable lenses). And some recent compact cameras like the S95/S100, Oly XZ1, Nikon P series are not far off in image quality at low ISO (but with distinct advantages over the G1x). Canon is just under pressure in this market segment and trying a new approach (this is the only Canon revolution for now).

Can you please tell us which M43 options you have in mind that are both, smaller and lighter, and have similar or better IQ? You are right, S100/G12 are not far off in terms of IQ at lower ISO, but the G1X provides you with more headroom to crop and edit from low to high ISO. The close focussing distance of the G1X is a limitation and I would hope that Canon in a firmware update provides auto switching between normal and macro mode in all operating modes and not only in Auto.

Umm....the IQ is very far from these compacts. You must have been looking at the edges of the studio setup, the zoom end is pretty bad at the corners. Choose RAW, peep at around the center of the image. If you're lucky, you'll be able to spot moire from the G1X cam.

No, I am looking at images out of G11 and G1X. And if you just look at them on a screen or do normal prints, it is really hard to tell the difference at low ISO. Now, if I try to get some more from the shadows of a G11 image taken at anything more than ISO 200 or crop, that is where the difference really shows. Or if you do a large print. But that still leaves my question to Nudibranco unanswered - and I guess he does not have one.

just check the GX1 from Panasonic with the 14-42x kit zoom. Or you can also check other bodies from Olympus especially the up and coming OM one. The M43 is compared in size in this site review of the G1x. So if you want compactness I would buy the GX1 (which is expandable).

Pentax-K-01 would be a better dealsmaller-quicker better IQ larger sensor and native K mount lens ranges with primes for a similar price rangeDXO score in onpar with Pentax K5/ Nikon d7000 and the same sensor size which is larger than G1X

it is funny how some people will convince themselves they are right no matter what and close behind a wall (or you are a CANON owned mind). You can even look at the Pana G3 which is an older model with the pancake 14-42 to know you are getting a lighter (20% lighter) flexible and interchangeable lens solution with the same size of a GX1. The pancake lens is a fine lens and you can read reviews that will proove that (check ephotozine for example or DXomark). Not a stellar lens but even the Canon lens is not (!). Do you have an objective review that compares the image qualities side by side and show this better G1X quality in practical life that you talk about?You say it is revolutionary (!?) but instead this camera is - heavier- bigger- not flexible- slow focusing and performance- lacks Macro

BTW, just to be fair, not only you get better flexibility from the G3 but a real EVF and by adding a .79x pana lens DMW-GWC1 to the pancake you make its range start at 22mm rather than 28mm (adding only 70g and still lighter than the G1X!). and if you compare to the latest entry in 43 cameras the OMD from Olympus you will have to face better stabilization, better EVF than G3, weatherproofness, and probably better high iso performance. The G1X will be obsolete in a few months. I hear Canon is preparing to launch at Photokina some new models that might address the shortcomings of your pet camera. maybe then Canon may show something that is not just a its BIG NAME and MARKETING. In the meantime they are falling behind even to Nikon in their high end turf. Too bad I own lots of Canon equip but everything has a cycle and I dont get paid by Canon.

Nudibranco, calm down. You are not the only one who cannot tell which lens can compete with the G1X. Now, let's assume the Pana pancake zoom delivers an IQ that equals the one of the G1X lens (from all I have read and seen it does not, but then I don't own one so cannot tell first hand), the zoom range is still less and so is the speed at wide angle.

Mcslsk, I doubt any of these people have any point. Some can't understand that a camera is a combination of many, many variables and it is how they are balanced that makes a camera compelling to some and not to others. Some people have to have a viewfinder. Some have to have the fastest AF. I personally have to have everything. That's why I have a D10, G1 X, and 7D. I've watched and researched cameras for many years, so if someone could point to one camera that can do everything I want I'd snatch it up in a heartbeat and sell all my current equipment. Let me see, what are some of the variables I consider when shopping for a camera: 1) Sensor IQ -- detail resolution, noise characterisitics, color; 2) Lens -- speed, range, detail resolution, chromatic aberrations, flare; 3) Camera -- AF speed, size, LCD, viewfinder, controls, speed, AF features, waterproof? etc etc etc; 4) Psychological factors -- Will people freeze? Can I get it into concerts? Where will I carry it? etc etc

Not recognizing the revolutionary design of the lens for me is the major shortfall of the review. That is disappointing because I was always under the impression that for the reviewers here, photographic elements of a camera are way more important than gimmicks like in camera filters or video capabilities. If you look at the lens, Canon has not only delivered high quality glass but also really taken it to the limits of what can be done given size restraints and also probably price point. There are only two other cameras that I had considered prior to he announcement of the G1X: The Fuji x100 and the Sony NEX 7. What made me go for the G1X is the lens! It is tiny, yet has a very acceptable zoom range and still starts at 2.8 and ends at 5.8 which is normal for most kit lenses (for camera with comparable sensor size). Thus I strongly believe that dpreview should revisit their review.

What leads you to say, mcslsk, that G1X lens is revolutionary? Glossy marketing or tests you do not refer to? In Canon corporate language, revolutionary is a cheap robot-assembled lens that is not tested by dpr-like people to reveal its limitations.

Read the forum, read the reviews on the lens. There is no other lens available at this size, speed and zoom range that gives this IQ. The combination of this lens, the sensor, Digi5 and in-camera software are what makes this IQ at the size of the G1X possible. The NEX does not have a comparable lens, Fuji does not, and neither does Pana. Show me a lens for a large sensor that matches or beats this lens in terms of IQ, size, zoom range and speed, whether assembled by robots in Japan or German engineers in the Black Forest.

You are right but I don't think DPR missed that which is why they still gave it a Silver Award despite compromise of losing a good macro mode and lens aperture and focusing. This is a camera for people who value IQ over other aspects. The reason the lens is so good because it is fixed (designed to perform best for the sensor), like the Fuji x100 does, I think that's one thing most people forget about fixed lens cameras.

You can take images of things (and people) that move just fine. The AF is not PEN fast (as R. Butler noted) but it isn't terribly slow either. Continues shooting is not fast (it is quite fast in low light situations, but not in normal light conditions, why, I don't know). And then there is always the option to choose an f-stop that gives you plenty DoF.

This Canon camera is a total dud at $800. But maybe at $350, 400 shekels tops we'll be interested in what it can deliver. Anyhow, I seriously dobt that ANYONE has been anxiously waiting for this particular ho-humm camera.

If anyone would like to read this exact same statement a few hundred more times, please refer to every other post Frank has made with regard to this camera over the last three months. Why someone who hates a camera would waste so much time lobbying against it is beyond me.

I think the G1 X is likely fail auto focus in low light (I ran into this problem with Sam NX200). Indoors, try AF at max aperture, which should AF okay and then keep zooming in and retrying AF at some intervals. It is likely the AF will run out of the needed light at some F stop. DPR did not catch this on NX200 and will talk around it on G1 X.

This is subjective, ~RAW. In my NT200 case, I was inside a well-lit photo store and the AF gave out almost at the full zoom-in (and recovered at zoom-out). I chalked it up to "Providence" and did not buy it.

This is one reason the pre-announced Pana zoom m4/3 lens have me curious -- it is supposed to have constant-F during zooming.

"The focusing time increases further when focusing at the long end of the lens and in low light where you'll occasionally see some 'focus-hunting'. That said, as long as your focus area is contrasty enough, the lens will almost always eventually focus even in very dark conditions. The AF illuminator can help but always illuminates the center of the frame, rendering it useless when moving the AF away from the center."

Speaking for myself, I was commenting on handling the Samsung NX200 more than once, with more than one lens and shooting with it--albeit at a store display. It had no trouble with the rather dark ceiling.

G1X was designed to get a large sensor compact camera with a usable zoom range. The form factor is intentionally to be the smallest possible (or smallish). There are consequences of this form factor: The collapsible lens' distortion is high and thus image must be corrected during processing. Further, this processing slows possibly down the fps rate.This lens design (be unobtrusive and collapsible) cannot cope well with close range photography, therefore the continuous switch back and forth to macro. Also the AF is sluggish (large sensor, narrow DOF, much AF work). So what you guys damn about this camera is coming from its being too small. I mean too small for the sensor size and for it was intended to be flat and bricklike. All in all the final achievement by Canon is outstanding considering the predefined selfconstraints. Here comes the multimillion dollar question: Who set the objectives right: Canon with G1X or Nikon with the ONE system? Sales figures will tell.

In answer to your "multimillion dollar question," we start by admitting that both Nikon and Canon had to make substantial compromises in order to achieve the small form factor. There seem to be all too many complaints about the G1 X that don't properly take the design constraints into account. Those compromises will make both Nikon's ONE system and the Canon G1 X unacceptable to a large number of enthusiasts. That said, I believe that Canon has the better of the two in its approach.

all things considered...anyone with good photography accumen looking for a backup would go with the Nikon for its greater versatility. Conversely, if it is going to be your only camera, the Canon gets the nod, for, despite its niggles, has superior IQ...if you can get the shot.

Right. This a camera designed for IQ in a compact size. This explains why it had to use a larger glass. Slow AF is due to the large lens, and probably slower to make it more accurate. If the lens would be designed to have a larger aperture, it would introduced more distortion, CA and light fall off unless they make the lens even bigger. Canon has set it right over the 1 system since people buy cameras for better IQ. The 1 system is Professional in price and hardware but the sensor. Nikon, why bother with an ILC if there's 4/3 and mirrorless APS-C out there. Additionally, they're alone in this format..ugggh.

I already have a DSLR. I'm in the market for something pocketable. If the G1X had fast AF, a low shot-to-shot cycle time (maybe 0.4 seconds), a MUCH larger buffer, and 60p full HD video with simultaneous capture of stills & video, I might be interested in it. A bigger battery (current one is rated at 250 shots!?), digital + optical image stabilization (like Sony's Steadyshot with Active Mode), and a motorized zoom (for video) would be nice. Right now, I have the Sony HX30V on preorder because after extensive research and owning the HX9V, I feel that it will fit my needs the best at any price, but man would it be nice to have the high iso capabilities of the G1X's sensor.

worth noting (and previously mentioned, albeit as a footnote), the focus range of the camera does not just limit it to lack of macro-focus, but any close focusing at all. while the specs inform you of min. focusing distances, this is at the widest setting... at anything truly usable, you're 2-4 feet away from the subject. what does this mean in real life? difficulty in taking still life shots; no photos of the wedding ring (unless you're looking for a torso shot); no flower shots; no headshots with the lens at a longer range... the specs don't lie, but they do not really give any indication as to real-world use. i ended up returning mine as i'd have to limit my shooting to landscape and/or carry a close-up filter... and the trade off of excellent IQ (it has that in spades) is not a good tradeoff for missing the shot and/or having to compromise shooting position.

The Whole G line should be redesigned and should change the decades old designi.e. brick like camera into a New Refreshed style to suit fan boys and newcomers Should be F2 and should be capable of macro for the hefty price

The design of the G1X's body seems fine, it simply needs an improved lens, better close focus, and ideally Canon could start playing with better auto focus. Didn't Fuji do a point and shoot with phase detection auto focus? I believe Fuji dedicated a few pixels in the middle of the sensor to this DSLRlike system.

HowaboutRAW: "The lens on the G6 isn't huge, and that's F/2.0. It zooms less than the G12, but I'm good with that. So "twice" is a big exaggeration."

The G1X has over six times bigger a sensor than the G6. See http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canong1x/ : "The G1 X's sensor is 20% smaller than in most Canon DSLRs, but that still makes it 16% larger than Four Thirds, more than twice the size of the sensor in Nikon's 1 cameras and over six times the size of the sensors in previous Canon G-series compacts."

What, then, are you referring to? The larger the sensor, the larger the lens.

Bought the G1X camera March 2. On march 6, purchased Adobe creative suites 5.5 design standard to upgrade CS 4 version for the raw converter for the G1X. If you search Adobe Photoshop CS5/ Extend: camera Raw support page (google) you will see that the G1X is in the supported camera list. This is a lie. The problem is this the latest version of raw conversion for CS Photoshop 5.5 is camera raw 6.6 which doesn't support this camera. In theory, it will come out in the next raw conversion v 6.7. There is a beta version of that raw converter available through Adobe labs. I have contacted Canon and informed them of this misrepresentation and called Adobe daily and am in an escalated case with Adobe, which is smoke and mirrors and gone nowhere. The Rock and the hard spot is is pretty simple. 1) Adobe will not make a backwards compatible raw converter to CS 4 and 2) the 5.5 version advertising the G1X raw as a supported platform is a lie. In the meantime they are Beta testing CS6 and Raw 7.

Just for info I downloaded the trial Beta version of CS6 with RAW 7, the G1X Raw files are not recognised in this either!I only use DPP for RAW conversion but my Adobe Bridge CS4 doesn't support G1X RAW files so am unable to save them into my library without converting to DNG first.

I do not use Adobe for anything ever since I used their pathetic Acrobat. Two years ago I realized the flash player is also Adobe and haven't updated it since. I hate using pdf tax forms and have nothing but trouble with it -- from the inability to accept foreign phone numbers to color-fixed blue that is difficult/impossible to see in B&W print. An arrogant company.

Now you guys forced me to decide. I’m gonna make! How it will be the best camera ever? Well: It will be a full frame, will fit in the palm of your hand, weighs three ounces, focal length of 6 mm to 1200 mm. The features will be limited only by your thinking: Everything you can think and desire the camera will do perfectly. I mean it will be led only and just by your mind! Will have so much resolution that you will have doubts if it is a reflection of reality that you have in your hand or the reality itself. Finally it will cost you a dollar. Something still to criticize?

With all that, I'd rather be able to just "wish" the perfect photograph or to be able to take the perfect photo with my eyes. Then I will be able to simple wish it to the printer, after I've invented bio WiFi. LOL

Since I can't have confirmed otherwise I'll assume what appears most likely: That this camera has an electronic shutter like other Canon compacts. Inevitably that raises the question:

Why can't we have electronic shutters in DSLRs? Silent shooting, smaller/cheaper bodies that do not break as easily (I've only had cameras serviced/bricked due to failing shutters). The flagship argument has been that it requires extra circuitry that reduces the effective sensor area, hence reducing image quality which is an unacceptable compromise for a DSLR. For as far as it really had to be that way all this time, it doesn't anymore.

Silent shooting is an "exciting" new feature on the Nikon D4. But if you choose this (= electronic shutter) you only get 2MP resolution. This says a lot about manufacturers' willingness to let us use electronic shutters. It is going to be a painfully slow process with painful arguments (if any) from manufacturers.

"Since I can't have confirmed otherwise I'll assume what appears most likely: That this camera has an electronic shutter like other Canon compacts. Inevitably that raises the question:"

1, electronic FIRST shutter =/= (fully) electronic shutter like that of the Nikon 1 series. The G1X "only" has the former, like the Nex 5N/7.

2, other Canon (both DSLR and P&S) cameras also have fully mechanic shutters. It's that P&S cameras have leaf shutters (just like the G1X) that make them quiet.

3, blooming is a serious problem; this is why electronic shutters are VERY rarely used, even in their first shutter form, let alone full support. It's only in the Nikon 1 series that it works adequately.

The reason compact cameras can do with a small leaf shutter in the lens rather than the big, clunky mechanism in DSLRs is that compacts have an electronic shutter. The leaf shutter is not involved in controlling the exposure time, but serves the simple purpose of being able to shut out light from the sensor. For CCDs this was necessary during readout to avoid smear (which I assume is what your blooming comment is referring to), and it is also necessary for long exposure noise reduction.

Agreed. I love my G1 X. You just talked me out of 30 minutes of telling people in this forum how to behave. Suffice it to say, the naysayers aren't right, but neither am I. Being anonymous doesn't give us the right to forget our manners and tell people how wrong they are for liking something....or disliking it. But don't tell anyone, me or Canon, what they "should" do. Later, infocus. Happy shooting!

Dan, my comment wasn't a generic "we should be out taking photos instead of sitting in front of our computers." It was specific to the comments on the G 1X. I've religiously followed all the comments on this camera at dpreview because I thought I might be interested in it.

And after reading every comment the main pros and cons of this camera were stated over and over and over again. It got repetitive and boring. It was as if no one was reading previous comments before posting.

Each of us has qualities we're looking for in a camera. And what's important to you may not be important to me. Initial comments about the pros and cons were helpful (as were all the reviews I read). But restating the same pts over and over does not make for a vibrant online forum.

Well, Dan, if one is really interested in the camera, then they should read at least some of the comments before chiming in. That's what makes for a solid online community. And what about those of us to are more regular to these forums? Why should we have to reread the same pros and cons over and over?

i have suggested to dpreview that they always have one thread devoted to the pros and cons of any equipment. There you could post your opinions to your heart's content. But, instead we have these same comments in just about every thread about this camera.

I've been a part of online communities for quite awhile. What I'm suggesting is an effort to make this community work better. And, make our time here more efficient.

It seems expensive for a "pocketable" camera, however I think it is the best choice (price vs quality) for underwater photography. The housing is 400$, that is a total of 1200$. An Ikelite housing for a large sensor camera is 1500$, at least.

Dan comment: "The G1X is a sloooooooow camera"You take a wonderful picture show it to a friend and he says: Oh what a pity ,such a wanderful picture mas it was taken with a slow camera.Aren't you ll mixing things?Ok it has a poor macro! Ok it is slow continuos shooting, ok bla bla bla, BUT IT TAKES WNDERFUL PICTUES WITH VERY VERY GOOD RESOLUTION! I repeat better than any M43, an even must of DSLR. It is enough to me! I CARE ABOUT IQ! You try elsewhere.

But you can't show your friends the photos you did not capture because the camera is so slow can you. Those photos you have lost for ever. If your thinking of buying this camera take a look at the BJP magazines review of the camera. They liked the camera IQ but they discovered handling issues that DPR even missed. They also show an excellent example of just how bad the optical viewfinder is as well. The macro issue is not even just macro photography. It can even effect tight portrait framing. Lots of info that is not displayed in the optical viewfinder. Bleep sounds that can mean two different things. The list just goes on and on. IQ is important but if the camera has dreadful handling you will miss shots. The BJP said the camera deserves a G2X version to sort out all the issues which is very fair comment.

Thank you Stu. I followed your advice isn'it, I quote'': G1X IS the HIGHEST IMAGE QUALITY professional fixed-zoom compact from any maker. But it deserves to be reworked as a G2X with better controls and a more accurate optical finder with vital settings and shooting information displayed." I say do you have a EOS 5D MII? Well there already is a better M III on the market! Can you get?. Let's bel real if the G1X was perfect in all those areas you are talking about NOBOBY EVER WOULD BUY A DSRL. I'll stick with it untill the full frame will be affordable to normal guys like. Till then I' ll get great photos with G1X. I'm not a Pro just a normal guy who LOVES Photography. Thank you anyway.

Carlos even if it had all those things added it would not replace a DSLR, as a compact camera cannot do things a DSLR can. It is aimed at a different type of photography. Different types of cameras for different types of photography. When you look at the camera sector the GX1 it is aimed at though even though it is good at the IQ it is very poor in other areas where it's competitors are good at. Pointless having great IQ if the handling and user interface are weak, because that will cost lost photos. Would have been a great IQ photo if only I had know, the shutter speed was to slow, the AF could not keep up with my child running, I had not confused the bleep noise meaning there was a problem with something being OK, or I had lost the portrait because I was still trying to get the lens set up into the close up setting but they were not willing to wait.

This G1X would be perfect with a brighter lense and Fuji colours.So I still have to wait unfortunately.I don't understand why they did not put a brighter lense to this camera like Fuji has done on X10.Maybe there will be further models with large sensors AND bright lenses this summer. So long, I will wait ..

"I don't understand why they did not put a brighter lense to this camera like Fuji has done on X10."

Because the sensor of the G1X is _much_ larger than the X10's.

Do you know what an f-number means?

f-number = (focal length) / ("effective" aperture)

Larger sensor ==> longer focal length ==> effective aperture must be larger to get same f-number.

In other words: It is easy to make a fast, small and relatively cheap lens for a small sensor (as in the Fuji X10 or Oly XZ-1). It is very hard (or physically impossible at some point) to do the same for a larger sensor. Why do you think that fast zooms for full frame DSLRs are so expensive?

You have a point, but Samsung hasn't had a problem making a wonderful, and small, 30mm F/2.0 lens for the APSC sensored NX cameras.

And the Canon G1, G2, G3, G5, and G6 cameras all had F/2.0 lenses--albeit with small sensors. (S90, S95, S100 too.)

Canon made a mistake with the G1X; at the wide angle this new Canon should open to F/2.0. Yes, I know it would cost more then. But here Canon has taken the Sony Nex route without the lens adapter option one can use with the Sony Nex cameras.

Thank you for this information, Andreas.You are probably right with this.However I hate all these compromises.And if this G1X would have been more expensive by maybe 200 Euros with a faster lense, it would be still in frame for this kind of camera. But so we have a large sensor and a slow lense now. How wonderful this camera could be, also in low light, if they would have equipped it with a fast lense ..Ok, just my opinion. I will wait further on for update of Fuji X10 or till Canon knows that large sensor and slow lense is not what we are dreaming about.

This camera has many flaws. The review tells you all about them (don't just look at the score!). Still, it may be the best choice for some people. For example if you are traveling and only want to bring _one_ relatively compact camera and no additional lenses and still want high image quality.

To all the people complaining about the "slow lens" of the G1X:Please show me a zoom lens that- covers a m4/3- or larger sensor- has a a zoom range, which is as versatile as the G1X's (3x or preferably 4x zoom range starting at wide angle)- is faster than the G1X's lens- is as compact as the G1X's lens(- and of course costs less than a G1X ;) )

Finally got to try one and still can't figure out why would anyone buy one.

Burst rate, AF and zoom feels really slow. The ring around the lens doesn't do anything though I couldn't help trying to twist it. So how do you manually focus? It's tricky! Makes the slow AF a bigger problems since the work around (MF) isn't so easy. The focus distance is annoyingly far too.

Feels nice too hold with good controls, but it's quite chunky and heavy; much more than a mirrorless+pancake. It would be uncomfortable to put the G1X in a pocket. Actually, I had my E-PL2+20/1.7 with me and it's more portable. IQ is good but in the same neighbourhood as current m4/3, but you're stuck w/ the mediocre lens.

Anyway, an m4/3 or NEX is a better buy even if you don't intend to buy another lens. Save yourself $300 and get an E-PM1. Or, if you need a swivel LCD and a VF, get the G3, which is $200 cheaper and LCD is even touch sensitive. Also, the EVF so much better. Both are more responsive than the G1X too.

I agree. Since the effort can't be put into OVFs for a compact, might as well make it a good EVF, so you have all the advantages of what you can do on the LCD screen. A good example of this being done in an inexpensive camera is the Nikon P60. No parallax issues, filters can be used without obscuring the finder, etc.

@Roland Karlsson: true, but any collapsible 14-42mm can easily slip in another pocket and the Panasonic X 14-42mm is barely bigger than a pancake. Sure the G1X is brighter but it's not bright enough for low-light conditions, where a bright prime (like the 20/1.7) is.

@Gesture: loved my P60, but it got stolen a while back. Totally prefer an EVF to a small OVF. The OVF is only good when trying to extend battery life and framing when its too bright to use the LCD.

Uh-oh! You know what happens whenever DPReview gives something a good score!

Remember this for next time, DPReview. If you can't complain enough about something, don't say anything at all. That's the advice of 90% of people on here.

When a great Sony camera comes out, say it's just a Sony and can't compete and no real pros or even enthusiasts use Sony, so the company shouldn't even bother. Then, when a Canon comes out, say how Sony is so far ahead, and Canon has fallen behind and Canon is as good as dead. Then, when a Nikon comes out, say how their product is too expensive for anyone to buy, and nobody would even think about buying it anyway because doesn't have enough features to warrant upgrading over the previous version.

Stick with that, and you're sure to have the people here in the comments section love you again!

Cool, what country do you live in? How does the X Pro1 do at ISO 12800?

Good to know that you haven't experienced any particular trouble, I wasn't taking Sergey Borachev too seriously. Wonder why so many up votes for claims about a camera barely anyone has yet? Well I kind of know the answer to that last.

When a company doesn't want to cripple its DSLR sales, even sales of the lowest and cheapest model they offer, they design an obviously compromised product that was supposed to be an answer to something. To me, it looks a lot more like another iteration of the old paradigm: if one doesn't have a proper, or honest answer to a question, or simply avoids the right answer by protecting some "higher interests", all one can go through is to raise more and more questions.

In law it's called perjury and it's punishable.In camera business it's called a mirrorless camera business model of a big DSLR maker.

The trouble with a camera that ticks all the boxes, is that they don't do anything really well. And this camera ticks a lot of boxes. Big sensor, lots of external controls, good flip out screen, optical view finder, bright lens, reasonable zoom range, well built, compact.

Those are the ticked boxes. But when it come time to own it, you find a few shortcomings that are going to niggle at you. You start by taking some portraits of your kids and find at a good portrait focal length that you only have F5, so the images, though sharp enough don't quite have that pop that you were expecting given the sensor size.

Then you take it to your kids football game and the shadows across the field late in the day combined with the limited zoom and slower aperture don't make a good combination.

So you take it to dinner with your friends. It fills your jacket pocket making you look overweight, so you leave it in a small bag. So when your friends birthday cake came out you missed the shot trying to get the camera out and stuffing around with the lens cap.

You chose not to loan it to your daughter for a trip to the city because it was too expensive to lose.

And then when you went for a bike ride you decided not to take it because you needed something that would fit more compactly in your riding top.

But for sure you would use it at the snow because it fits in your snow jacket. But when you went to use the optical view finder you couldn't see much, and combined with the slower response of the camera, you missed all the shots of your kids doing the jumps on the skis.

In my view the G1X actually comes close to being useful. It certainly has a great sensor and all the benefits that come with that, so it will suit some people. But if it were smaller, and faster focusing with an electronic viewfinder, then it would be a truly ground breaking product. As it is, there are better, smaller, faster options in the MILC competition.

@MalInOz: Next time I'll try rambling for a few posts about why I don't like a camera instead of going and doing something more enjoyable than pi$$ing all over a camera that perfectly sane and sensible people actually do like. Sorry man, but if you're such a steaming pile of loser that you feel the need to tell people why they shouldn't like something then having time to kill is the least of your worries. You aren't even killing your time, it's committing suicide before you can even get to it. You and other negative naysayer killjoys are the reason these forums suck balls most of the time. Go eat a bag of dicks.

Howard, I don't often offer criticism of a product. But I have in this case, and I am not exactly sure why.

Perhaps if all the issues with this camera had been addressed I would have had nothing to say. Perhaps also to a feeling that this camera got so close to ideal. If only it was smaller. If only it was faster.

There is a role for constructive criticism, and I will work on trying to make that more palatable. As for your comments, well you need to work on that too.

It would be interesting if the comments were split into two groups - those who have actually used the camera and those who have not - it seems most of the criticisms are coming from those who have not. It's easy to compare numbers and be an armchair critic.

When you compare the G1 X to it's actual competition ("fixed lens mirrorless cameras, with big sensors") then it starts to look pretty good.

Compare it to:* Leica X1 - it's a lot cheaper, and has a useful zoom range.* Fuji X100 - it's a lot cheaper, and has a useful zoom range.* Sigma DPX - it does much better in low light, and has a useful zoom range.

In fact, it seems like the G1 X is unique. It's the only large sensored compact with a fixed zoom lens.

Compare it to any high end small sensored fixed lens compact, and it costs more but provides better image quality. Even when compared to the Canon G12, Canon S100, Olympus XZ1 or Panasonic LX5.

If it is really true that 95% of the MILC camera buyers never buy a second lens, then there must be a huge potential market for fixed lens cameras. Unless people just want the option of buying more lenses, but rarely exercise that option...

"In fact, it seems like the G1 X is unique. It's the only large sensored compact with a fixed zoom lens."

The Ricoh GXR A16 Zoom was announced over a year ago and would have been released last November but for the floods, instead of around the same time as the G1 X. It even has a full 16MP APS-C sensor (as found in the D7000 and K-5) compared to the Canon's smaller m4/3-equivalent one.

The GXR is not an interchangeable lens sytem like a DSLR or a NEX/m43 etc of one camera + multiple lenses. It is an interchangeable *body* system for all intents, ie you swap the same Body Unit onto multiple different camera modules called Camera Units.

Only the GXR Mount A12 is an interchangeable lens camera (unit) and so has lens options. The other five GXR Camera Units are all fixed lens cameras.

All five of these fixed-lens GXR Camera Units have their direct market competitors in other maker's ranges of fixed-lens cameras each needing their own battery and SD card etc:

DPR is not a representative sample of the camera buying public. Most people buying MILC cameras buy them because they are expensive and therefore good or because some sales guy trying to get a good commission or a star on his sales chart, convinced them the need the flexibility of changing lenses even though both the buyer and the sales guy knew they probably would never actually change the lens.

Heck the average MIRC buyer doesn't know enough about cameras or photography to even know what lens they should put on instead of the one the came with the camera. The majority of people who buy MIRC cameras use them the same way the do a $50 fixed lens point and shoot.

Latest in-depth reviews

Canon's EOS R, the company's first full-frame mirrorless camera, impresses us with its image quality and color rendition. But it also comes with quirky ergonomics, uninspiring video features and a number of other shortcomings. Read our full review to see how the EOS R stacks up in today's full-frame mirrorless market.

No Nikon camera we've tested to date balances stills and video capture as well as the Nikon Z7. Though autofocus is less reliable than the D850, Nikon's first full-frame mirrorless gets enough right to earn our recommendation.

Nikon's Coolpix P1000 has moved the zoom needle from 'absurd' to 'ludicrous,' with an equivalent focal length of 24-3000mm. While it's great for lunar and still wildlife photography, we found that it's not suited for much else.

The Nikon Z7 is slated as a mirrorless equivalent to the D850, but it can't subject track with the same reliability as its DSLR counterpart. AF performance is otherwise good, except in low light where hunting can lead to missed shots.

Latest buying guides

What's the best camera for under $500? These entry level cameras should be easy to use, offer good image quality and easily connect with a smartphone for sharing. In this buying guide we've rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $500 and recommended the best.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Sony mirrorlses cameras in several categories to make your decisions easier.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Canon DSLRs in several categories to make your decisions easier.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Nikon DSLRs in several categories to make your decisions easier.

What’s the best camera for less than $1000? The best cameras for under $1000 should have good ergonomics and controls, great image quality and be capture high-quality video. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing under $1000 and recommended the best.

Canon's EOS R, the company's first full-frame mirrorless camera, impresses us with its image quality and color rendition. But it also comes with quirky ergonomics, uninspiring video features and a number of other shortcomings. Read our full review to see how the EOS R stacks up in today's full-frame mirrorless market.

We spoke to wildfire photographer Stuart Palley about his experiences shooting the recent Woolsey fire, why the Nikon Z7 isn't quite ready to take a permanent spot in his gear bag, and 'that' Tweet from Donald Trump.

The Z7 presented Nikon with a stiff challenge: how to build a mirrorless camera that measures up to its own DSLRs and can deliver a familiar experience to Nikon users. Chris and Jordan tell us whether they think Nikon succeeded.

Nikon has released firmware version 1.02 that resolves a flickering issue when scrolling through images, an ISO limitation problem, and an occasional crash that could occur when displaying certain Raw files.

The Insta360 One X is the company's latest consumer 360-degree camera, supporting 5.7K video, including excellent image stabilization, as well as 18MP photos. And, in our experience, it's a really fun camera to use.